<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.7" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Ray Fowler Interview</title>
	<link>http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-ray-fowler-interview/</link>
	<description>UFO News, Views, and More</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 17 May 2008 02:06:35 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: njf</title>
		<link>http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-ray-fowler-interview/#comment-3625</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 17:30:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-ray-fowler-interview/#comment-3625</guid>
					<description>Reading through all of your writings here, I see the phrases 'I think' and 'I suspect' used over and over again...which is perfectly fine, you are entitled to your opinion, and for all I know you may even be right about this case being a complete hoax (although my guess would be that a mixture of the authentic and the fraudulent would be a more likely scenario). But just because Ray Fowler disagrees with your conclusions, I'm sorry, but I don't think that provides an adequate foundation for an attack on his objectivity or integrity. Same thing goes for the use of the term 'promoting and creating' in association with the work of Hopkins, Jacobs, Mack, etc., your beliefs about the likelihood of the reality of the abduction phemomenon tells us exactly nothing about the true motivations of those researchers. Some of these people might be totally wrong in their conclusions, but so what, there's nothing dishonorable about that. I'm not a researcher, just a long-time student of this kind of material, and what I want to hear are more dialogue and more creative thought, not endless debates about who is right and who is a gullible fool, self-promoter, or disinformation artist. The kind of stuff you're doing here generates more heat than light, IMHO, and that doesn't get us anywhere, regardless of what the truth might be about any particular case.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Reading through all of your writings here, I see the phrases &#8216;I think&#8217; and &#8216;I suspect&#8217; used over and over again&#8230;which is perfectly fine, you are entitled to your opinion, and for all I know you may even be right about this case being a complete hoax (although my guess would be that a mixture of the authentic and the fraudulent would be a more likely scenario). But just because Ray Fowler disagrees with your conclusions, I&#8217;m sorry, but I don&#8217;t think that provides an adequate foundation for an attack on his objectivity or integrity. Same thing goes for the use of the term &#8216;promoting and creating&#8217; in association with the work of Hopkins, Jacobs, Mack, etc., your beliefs about the likelihood of the reality of the abduction phemomenon tells us exactly nothing about the true motivations of those researchers. Some of these people might be totally wrong in their conclusions, but so what, there&#8217;s nothing dishonorable about that. I&#8217;m not a researcher, just a long-time student of this kind of material, and what I want to hear are more dialogue and more creative thought, not endless debates about who is right and who is a gullible fool, self-promoter, or disinformation artist. The kind of stuff you&#8217;re doing here generates more heat than light, IMHO, and that doesn&#8217;t get us anywhere, regardless of what the truth might be about any particular case.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Nick Redfern</title>
		<link>http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-ray-fowler-interview/#comment-3623</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 15:35:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-ray-fowler-interview/#comment-3623</guid>
					<description>I'm actually not sure why some of the comments occasionally go to moderation, and where I have to go in and approve the posting of them manually. Maybe it just picks up something in the link. 
But all posts do eventually get posted. If there's a delay it's just because I'm not around at the time it's posted, and so has to wait until I log in.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m actually not sure why some of the comments occasionally go to moderation, and where I have to go in and approve the posting of them manually. Maybe it just picks up something in the link.<br />
But all posts do eventually get posted. If there&#8217;s a delay it&#8217;s just because I&#8217;m not around at the time it&#8217;s posted, and so has to wait until I log in.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: wintermuse X9</title>
		<link>http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-ray-fowler-interview/#comment-3621</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:39:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-ray-fowler-interview/#comment-3621</guid>
					<description>It would be useful if I had known that my comments would be held up due to posting links or being "new." Just why is that, anyway? 

I have posted other comments on ufomystic.com before, and they appeared right away. I thought some computer or network glitch had prevented my posts, which is why I tried more than once to make comment. 

As a result, my comments appear rather duplicative, which was not my intent. 

I know my comments are harsh, and I will restrain myself from making personal comments in future, but, while you may "disagree with [me] on a massive scale," how familiar are you with Fowler's extensive writings about Betty Andreassen and Robert Luca, Sr.?

I have been in extensive communication with Bob Luca, Jr., for several months now, by telephone and email, and the things he has told me about how this "abduction" scenario, which I believe to be a hoax, and fraudulent, has unfolded over the past 3 decades is both extremely involved and dark.

Of the several children of both Betty and Bob, only Becky has endorsed the story as being genuine, and she has now begun her own website, and sells sheets of supposed "alien writing" for $25 a pop. Betty has said the "legacy" of the story has now been handed over to Becky, due to Betty's age and health. 

The real "ringmaster" in this circus, from the beginning, has been Robert A. Luca, Betty's second husband. His son, Robert J. Luca, went public on his website several months ago, finally, after his father was publically quoted as saying his son was also an abductee, which Bob, Jr. says is not only a lie, but personally offensive. 

While Bob, Jr. is not as literate or as coherent in his writings as one might prefer, based on his own troubled history, which I suspect was in large part promulgated by what he went through as a child and teenager growing up in a rather dysfunctional family, especially due to the negative influence and abusive behavior of his father, I think he's telling the truth about his father's fraud and manipulation of not only his wife Betty, who I suspect is delusional and deeply influenced by her husband's pathological abuse and manipulation, but has also engaged in specific types of hoaxing and fraud in order to also influence and manipulate Ray Fowler. 

The fact that, after several years of dealing with Robert A. Luca, and his wife Betty, that he has now become convinced that he, too, is an abductee is just one indication that Fowler has lost his early objectivity and discriminatory capabilities in terms of being able to do genuine, objective, serious ufo and abductee research. 

If you read Fowler's presentation of the Andreassen case, over several books, you should be able to see what I mean. It's a fact that Robert A. Luca has many times hypnotized his wife, allegedly in order to draw out her unfolding story over a great length of time, but I suspect he has, by the nature of his questioning and influence of Betty under hypnosis, and in many other ways, manipulated her to the point where she has also become quite delusional. It is pretty well established now that the kind of leading regressive hypnosis techniques employed by Luca, and Budd Hopkins, for example, often leads to confabulation, synthesized or false memories, and other psychologically and emotionally damaging syndromes, particularly self-reinforcing beliefs in things that really never happened in actuality. 

Fowler, if he did not initially know this, must have at some point picked up on what was happening, and being a rather good writer and intelligent man, cannot have overlooked that, over the years, the abduction scenarios and supposed events going on in Betty's household were being fabricated and manipulated. Or, perhaps he became convinced himself, for whatever reasons, that the stories were true, and thus became a subjective reporter, not objective, and a "believer" himself.

His initial books did rather well in the market, and I suspect part of his continuing support of the "Andreassen Affair" story is financial in nature, and me may also find it extremely difficult if not impossible personally to, at this point, go back on all the stuff he sold and promoted via his books, as to do so would expose him and the Andreassen/Luca camp as having not only manipulated and having hoaxed him, but it would be a personal reversal where he would of had to admit his earlier work with them was false, and that he got taken in. 

There is a lot more info that will be provided early next year which Bob Luca, Jr., and I have been slowly developing for public presentation, but that is all I have to say for now.

I would be glad to discuss these matters directly with either Fowler or Robert A. Luca, if they are willing to talk with me about these issues. 

I think we need to "clear the air" about this long-term hoax, in my opinion, and that Fowler also needs to re-examine his involvement in this whole fiasco, as he too has some responsiblity for helping create and promote it. 

I do not dismiss the possibility of alien abduction, although I find it highly unlikely, but the history of claims over the past 30 years and more by Fowler, Hopkins, Mack, Jacobs, and other authors in promoting and creating this miasma of myth and hoax truly needs to be addressed clearly, directly, and empirically. 

I think it will be found in the long run that a false belief system and hoax has been foisted on the more gullible members of the "ufo community" and the greater public at large, and I find that both disturbing and reprehensible. 

Now even Stan Friedman, long a defender of aspects of MJ-12, with his own vested financial and personal stake in these matters, has turned to the infamous Betty and Barney Hill case, and I think he's promoting and supporting false beliefs and fabricated data there, also. 

Frankly, I'm quite tired and angry about the degree of turmoil, disinformation, diversion of resources and energy that these authors, believers, and supporters have wrought on what I consider legitimate ufo cases and related research, and the myths that have been seeded and are growing within the public consciousness about this and ufo witnesses and researchers in general. 

It's time to clean out the stables of this horseshit if there is to be any hope for real, scientific ufo research and progress in this field, which is currently and for a very long time now in disarray, in part due to the alien abduction mythos and its promoters. 

I myself had a close encounter of the first kind over 35 years ago, along with some other witnesses, and had only one other in July of this year, which I found inexplicable, and which I have posted about here on your website in response to Greg Bishop's "Insectoid Aliens" post of October 18th. So I am not a skeptibunker by any means, but neither am I a believer. I try to be as open as possible, and lean toward Vallee's theories about ufo's and "alien" intelligence, but from as purely objective, deep, scientific, and empirical viewpoint as I can. 

I welcome any debate others might wish to engage in with me over my opinions about Andreassen/Luca or Ray Fowler that they wish to involve themselves in.

It's long past time to clear the air about the "alien abduction" mythos and those who helped create and promote it, as it is destructive and diversionary to real, objective research and progress in the "ufo field," IMHO.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It would be useful if I had known that my comments would be held up due to posting links or being &#8220;new.&#8221; Just why is that, anyway? </p>
<p>I have posted other comments on ufomystic.com before, and they appeared right away. I thought some computer or network glitch had prevented my posts, which is why I tried more than once to make comment. </p>
<p>As a result, my comments appear rather duplicative, which was not my intent. </p>
<p>I know my comments are harsh, and I will restrain myself from making personal comments in future, but, while you may &#8220;disagree with [me] on a massive scale,&#8221; how familiar are you with Fowler&#8217;s extensive writings about Betty Andreassen and Robert Luca, Sr.?</p>
<p>I have been in extensive communication with Bob Luca, Jr., for several months now, by telephone and email, and the things he has told me about how this &#8220;abduction&#8221; scenario, which I believe to be a hoax, and fraudulent, has unfolded over the past 3 decades is both extremely involved and dark.</p>
<p>Of the several children of both Betty and Bob, only Becky has endorsed the story as being genuine, and she has now begun her own website, and sells sheets of supposed &#8220;alien writing&#8221; for $25 a pop. Betty has said the &#8220;legacy&#8221; of the story has now been handed over to Becky, due to Betty&#8217;s age and health. </p>
<p>The real &#8220;ringmaster&#8221; in this circus, from the beginning, has been Robert A. Luca, Betty&#8217;s second husband. His son, Robert J. Luca, went public on his website several months ago, finally, after his father was publically quoted as saying his son was also an abductee, which Bob, Jr. says is not only a lie, but personally offensive. </p>
<p>While Bob, Jr. is not as literate or as coherent in his writings as one might prefer, based on his own troubled history, which I suspect was in large part promulgated by what he went through as a child and teenager growing up in a rather dysfunctional family, especially due to the negative influence and abusive behavior of his father, I think he&#8217;s telling the truth about his father&#8217;s fraud and manipulation of not only his wife Betty, who I suspect is delusional and deeply influenced by her husband&#8217;s pathological abuse and manipulation, but has also engaged in specific types of hoaxing and fraud in order to also influence and manipulate Ray Fowler. </p>
<p>The fact that, after several years of dealing with Robert A. Luca, and his wife Betty, that he has now become convinced that he, too, is an abductee is just one indication that Fowler has lost his early objectivity and discriminatory capabilities in terms of being able to do genuine, objective, serious ufo and abductee research. </p>
<p>If you read Fowler&#8217;s presentation of the Andreassen case, over several books, you should be able to see what I mean. It&#8217;s a fact that Robert A. Luca has many times hypnotized his wife, allegedly in order to draw out her unfolding story over a great length of time, but I suspect he has, by the nature of his questioning and influence of Betty under hypnosis, and in many other ways, manipulated her to the point where she has also become quite delusional. It is pretty well established now that the kind of leading regressive hypnosis techniques employed by Luca, and Budd Hopkins, for example, often leads to confabulation, synthesized or false memories, and other psychologically and emotionally damaging syndromes, particularly self-reinforcing beliefs in things that really never happened in actuality. </p>
<p>Fowler, if he did not initially know this, must have at some point picked up on what was happening, and being a rather good writer and intelligent man, cannot have overlooked that, over the years, the abduction scenarios and supposed events going on in Betty&#8217;s household were being fabricated and manipulated. Or, perhaps he became convinced himself, for whatever reasons, that the stories were true, and thus became a subjective reporter, not objective, and a &#8220;believer&#8221; himself.</p>
<p>His initial books did rather well in the market, and I suspect part of his continuing support of the &#8220;Andreassen Affair&#8221; story is financial in nature, and me may also find it extremely difficult if not impossible personally to, at this point, go back on all the stuff he sold and promoted via his books, as to do so would expose him and the Andreassen/Luca camp as having not only manipulated and having hoaxed him, but it would be a personal reversal where he would of had to admit his earlier work with them was false, and that he got taken in. </p>
<p>There is a lot more info that will be provided early next year which Bob Luca, Jr., and I have been slowly developing for public presentation, but that is all I have to say for now.</p>
<p>I would be glad to discuss these matters directly with either Fowler or Robert A. Luca, if they are willing to talk with me about these issues. </p>
<p>I think we need to &#8220;clear the air&#8221; about this long-term hoax, in my opinion, and that Fowler also needs to re-examine his involvement in this whole fiasco, as he too has some responsiblity for helping create and promote it. </p>
<p>I do not dismiss the possibility of alien abduction, although I find it highly unlikely, but the history of claims over the past 30 years and more by Fowler, Hopkins, Mack, Jacobs, and other authors in promoting and creating this miasma of myth and hoax truly needs to be addressed clearly, directly, and empirically. </p>
<p>I think it will be found in the long run that a false belief system and hoax has been foisted on the more gullible members of the &#8220;ufo community&#8221; and the greater public at large, and I find that both disturbing and reprehensible. </p>
<p>Now even Stan Friedman, long a defender of aspects of MJ-12, with his own vested financial and personal stake in these matters, has turned to the infamous Betty and Barney Hill case, and I think he&#8217;s promoting and supporting false beliefs and fabricated data there, also. </p>
<p>Frankly, I&#8217;m quite tired and angry about the degree of turmoil, disinformation, diversion of resources and energy that these authors, believers, and supporters have wrought on what I consider legitimate ufo cases and related research, and the myths that have been seeded and are growing within the public consciousness about this and ufo witnesses and researchers in general. </p>
<p>It&#8217;s time to clean out the stables of this horseshit if there is to be any hope for real, scientific ufo research and progress in this field, which is currently and for a very long time now in disarray, in part due to the alien abduction mythos and its promoters. </p>
<p>I myself had a close encounter of the first kind over 35 years ago, along with some other witnesses, and had only one other in July of this year, which I found inexplicable, and which I have posted about here on your website in response to Greg Bishop&#8217;s &#8220;Insectoid Aliens&#8221; post of October 18th. So I am not a skeptibunker by any means, but neither am I a believer. I try to be as open as possible, and lean toward Vallee&#8217;s theories about ufo&#8217;s and &#8220;alien&#8221; intelligence, but from as purely objective, deep, scientific, and empirical viewpoint as I can. </p>
<p>I welcome any debate others might wish to engage in with me over my opinions about Andreassen/Luca or Ray Fowler that they wish to involve themselves in.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s long past time to clear the air about the &#8220;alien abduction&#8221; mythos and those who helped create and promote it, as it is destructive and diversionary to real, objective research and progress in the &#8220;ufo field,&#8221; IMHO.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Nick Redfern</title>
		<link>http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-ray-fowler-interview/#comment-3619</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 04:18:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-ray-fowler-interview/#comment-3619</guid>
					<description>Wintermuse:

Sometimes comments don't go automatically on to the site. If a person is new, or the comments contain links, they sometimes go into a section of the site where I have to go in and approve them; hence the delay in them appearing.

You are entitled to your opinion on Ray and his research and findings; although I have to say I disagree with you on a massive scale.

Maybe Ray is reading this. If so, he may want to respond to your words and comments.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wintermuse:</p>
<p>Sometimes comments don&#8217;t go automatically on to the site. If a person is new, or the comments contain links, they sometimes go into a section of the site where I have to go in and approve them; hence the delay in them appearing.</p>
<p>You are entitled to your opinion on Ray and his research and findings; although I have to say I disagree with you on a massive scale.</p>
<p>Maybe Ray is reading this. If so, he may want to respond to your words and comments.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: wintermuse X9</title>
		<link>http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-ray-fowler-interview/#comment-3616</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 03:21:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-ray-fowler-interview/#comment-3616</guid>
					<description>I've tried twice now posting a comment about this subject, but neither post showed up. 

See: http://www.luca65.com/page2.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve tried twice now posting a comment about this subject, but neither post showed up. </p>
<p>See: <a href="http://www.luca65.com/page2.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.luca65.com/page2.html</a>
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: wintermuse X9</title>
		<link>http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-ray-fowler-interview/#comment-3615</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 03:19:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-ray-fowler-interview/#comment-3615</guid>
					<description>See: http://www.luca65.com/page2.html
for some pertinent data from the son of Robert Luca, Sr. and his stepmom Betty Andreassen about this long-term abductee scenario being a fraud and a hoax.

Raymond E. Fowler long ago did decent research, but when he hooked up with the Andreassen/Luca claims, he lost his objectivity. He also now believes he, too, is an alien abductee. This whole situation is really quite sad.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>See: <a href="http://www.luca65.com/page2.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.luca65.com/page2.html</a><br />
for some pertinent data from the son of Robert Luca, Sr. and his stepmom Betty Andreassen about this long-term abductee scenario being a fraud and a hoax.</p>
<p>Raymond E. Fowler long ago did decent research, but when he hooked up with the Andreassen/Luca claims, he lost his objectivity. He also now believes he, too, is an alien abductee. This whole situation is really quite sad.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: wintermuse X9</title>
		<link>http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-ray-fowler-interview/#comment-3614</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 03:15:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-ray-fowler-interview/#comment-3614</guid>
					<description>I think Raymond E. Fowler has, over time, become a rather poor and unreliable researcher, co-perpretator of a massive hoax and fraud with his series of books about Betty Andreassen (5 books over almost 30 years, starting with "The Andreassen Affair"!), and is now convinced that he, too, is an alien abductee. 

Neither Betty or Becky Andreassen is an abductee, nor is Betty's 2nd husband, Robert Luca. Robert Luca is really some piece of work, an egomaniac and self-aggrandizing, alcoholic manipulator. 

See:
http://www.luca65.com/page2.html 
for further details. I know an awful lot about this scenario, and it's one of the most elaborate and long-term "abductee" hoaxes in existence. 

More on all this will be publically known within the next few months.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think Raymond E. Fowler has, over time, become a rather poor and unreliable researcher, co-perpretator of a massive hoax and fraud with his series of books about Betty Andreassen (5 books over almost 30 years, starting with &#8220;The Andreassen Affair&#8221;!), and is now convinced that he, too, is an alien abductee. </p>
<p>Neither Betty or Becky Andreassen is an abductee, nor is Betty&#8217;s 2nd husband, Robert Luca. Robert Luca is really some piece of work, an egomaniac and self-aggrandizing, alcoholic manipulator. </p>
<p>See:<br />
<a href="http://www.luca65.com/page2.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.luca65.com/page2.html</a><br />
for further details. I know an awful lot about this scenario, and it&#8217;s one of the most elaborate and long-term &#8220;abductee&#8221; hoaxes in existence. </p>
<p>More on all this will be publically known within the next few months.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
